Dryden and Holland J.A. van der Welle bron J.A. van der Welle, Dryden and Holland. J.B. Wolters, Groningen 1962 Zie voor verantwoording: http://www.dbnl.org/tekst/well022dryd01_01/colofon.htm © 2010 dbnl / J.A. van der Welle V Aan mijn gezin. J.A. van der Welle, Dryden and Holland VI Acknowledgements Having come to the end of my academic studies, I wish to express my deep thankfulness to those who have contributed to the enrichment of my knowledge and to the completion of this dissertation. With feelings of sincere gratitude I remember the Professors of the University of Amsterdam. Through their teaching and guidance I have been prepared to undertake this study. My special thanks are due to Professor H. Schreuder of the Free University for his willingness to be my promotor, and for his kind assistance and encouragement during the preparation of this work. I also feel happy to record my obligations to Dr. J. Veldkamp of Hilversum. Though not being their pupil in a narrower sense of the word, I still wish to express my great appreciation for the unstinted way in which they have put their time and resources at my disposal. Further acknowledgements are due to the staffs of the British Museum, the University Libraries at Amsterdam, Leyden and Utrecht, the Royal Library and the Public Record Office at The Hague, the Municipal Record Offices of Leyden and Culemborg, and the Municipal Library at Haarlem. Finally I owe my thanks to Mr. Peter King of Cambridge University, who has critically read the typescript and made many valuable suggestions. To all these benefactors I feel greatly indebted. J.A. van der Welle, Dryden and Holland 1 Abbreviations Birch = Thomas Birch, The History of the Royal Society of London, London 1754. Cal. of S.P. Col. = Calendar of State Papers Colonial. Cal. of S.P. Dom. = Calendar of State Papers Domestic. Colenbrander = H.T. Colenbrander, Bescheiden uit vreemde archieven omtrent de grote Nederlandsche zeeoorlogen, 's-Gravenhage 1919. Ker = W.P. Ker, Essays of John Dryden, Oxford 1926, 2 vls. Knuttel = W.P.C. Knuttel, Catalogus van de Pamfletten-verzameling berustende in de Koninklijke Bibliotheek, 's-Gravenhage 1889-1920. Scott-Saintsbury = The Works of John Dryden, edited by Sir Walter Scott, revised by George Saintsbury, Edinburgh 1882-92. Sprat = Thomas Sprat, The History of the Royal Society of London, London 1734, 4th edition. Summers = Montague Summers, Dryden, The Dramatic Works, London 1931-32. Periodicals: The abbreviations used in the bibliographies. J.A. van der Welle, Dryden and Holland 3 Introduction ‘Heaven be my witness that I, at any rate, and of all men, don't want Johnnie Dryden dug up again’1. These lines, written by Ezra Pound, clearly suggest that there is not much pleasure to be expected for the modern reader who is going to occupy himself with Dryden, ‘that outstanding aridity’2. Glorious John3 seems to have sadly dwindled into Johnnie Dryden, at least for Ezra Pound. He tells us that even the first syllable of Dryden's name brought about an ‘association of ideas’ which prevented him from reading his poetry and that Mr. Eliot's endeavours to defend that poet4 had served only to strengthen his resolve ‘never, never again, to open either John Dryden, his works or any comment upon them’. We might take the last passage as a hint and try to find out if these ‘endeavours’ will give some justification for spending time and labour on Dryden's works. Mr. Eliot does not agree with those who think that the material which Dryden used is not fit for poetry. According to him, it was precisely one of Dryden's merits that he often turned ‘the prosaic into the poetic’, that he made trivial things magnificent. He praises Dryden's preciseness and his full round statements, but also indicates an almost complete lack of ‘suggestiveness’. This leads him to the question if verse can be poetry without this quality. His answer is as modest as it is guarded: ‘What is man to decide what poetry is’. However this may be, Mr. Eliot is convinced that it will be dangerous to ignore the standards which Dryden set for English verse. Apparently there is - and probably there will always be - much difference of opinion as to the artistic value of Dryden's work, even between critics so like-minded in other matters of literary art as Ezra Pound and T.S. Eliot. Nevertheless few will disagree that there are some positive qualities in Dryden's writing that will for ever save him from oblivion. Apart from his skill in satire and the lively style of his 1 Literary Essays of Ezra Pound, edited by T.S. Eliot, London 1954, p. 70. 2 ibidem. 3 Sir Walter Scott referred several times to Dryden as ‘Glorious John’ in his novel The Pirate a.o. in the chapters 36 and 37. 4 Cf. T.S. Eliot, Selected Essays, London 1932, pp. 305-16. J.A. van der Welle, Dryden and Holland 4 prose, he is esteemed for his capacity to mould his thoughts into easy and significant words; for his complete statements; in short, for his technical dexterity. His importance for literary criticism should not be underrated; it is all very well for modern readers to admire Chaucer, Shakespeare and Milton, but we should remember that Dryden was one of the first to point the way. Though nowadays nobody will assign to him ‘the third place’ in English literature1, he is by no means a forgotten poet. Reprints of his poetry at regular intervals and occasional comment from critics and scholars in England and America indicate that he is still read. It may be too early to speak of ‘Dryden redivivus’, but it would be strange indeed, if an age that shows remarkable appreciation of Pope, would not in course of time bestow some share of the praise on his predecessor to whom he owed so much. To enumerate Dryden's alleged or real shortcomings, both in his work and in his character, is not difficult either. It has long been a commonplace to assert that he does not excel in profundity of thought; that he was often more interested in the rhetorical than in the philosophical value of his words. It would seem that these notions need reconsideration after Bredvold's careful study2. The latter proved convincingly that Dryden was deeply involved in seventeenth century philosophical problems and never hesitated to inform his readers about his ideas. It cannot be denied, however, that his poetry lacks certain qualities that are vaguely felt as poetic; ‘wonder and brooding reverie were not of his world; the divine illusion was not for him’3. Indeed, this rather narrow view of poetry has prevented many a reader from appreciating Dryden. Moreover, he was sometimes a hack-writer, driving himself in his anxiety to supply the market, and his abject adulation of superiors and patrons, though partly due to the custom of the time, can hardly find favour in the eyes of modern readers. It may also be regretted that the licentiousness of ‘good King Charles's golden days’ finds so much illustration in Dryden's comedies. And last but not least, he was often 1 As Sir Walter Scott did in his ‘Advertisement’ of the complete edition of Dryden's works: ‘...who may claim at least the third place in that honoured list, and who has given proofs of greater versatility of talent than either Shakespeare or Milton, though justly placed inferior to them in their peculiar provinces’. Scott-Saintsbury I, p. XI. 2 L.I. Bredvold, The Intellectual Milieu of John Dryden, Michigan 1934. 3 Cf. Mark van Doren, The Poetry of John Dryden, Cambridge 1931, chapter I. J.A. van der Welle, Dryden and Holland 5 inconsistent, especially in his criticism, but also in his religion and - to a lesser degree - in politics. It would require a separate chapter to discuss the passages where Dryden contradicts himself or rejects opinions and theories he had once vigorously defended. One or two well-known and striking examples must suffice here. In the preface to The Rival Ladies (1664) he prescribes rhymed verse as the fit vehicle for heroic plays. He did the same in his Essay of Dramatick Poesie and even more vigorously in the Defence of an Essay of Dramatique Poesie against an attack from Sir Rob. Howard (1668). Just ten years later he dropped it in All for Love (1678). Being a Puritan by descent, he became a champion of the Church of England, but changed his tenets again for those of the Roman Catholic Church under James II. The author of the Heroic Stanzas to the memory of Cromwell became in little more than a year the panegyrist of Charles II (Astraea Redux). Yet he should not be too hastily dismissed as insincere. Many inconsistencies in Dryden, which seem to be due to mere weakness of character, may have been caused by his thoroughgoing scepticism. He fell in with the spirit of the time, which was highly sceptical. There is abundant proof that the tendency appealed to him. In his own words he was ‘naturally inclined to scepticism in philosophy’1, a self-revelation more or less anticipated in A Defence of an Essay of Dramatique Poesie: ‘.... my whole discourse was sceptical...which is imitated by the modest inquisitions of the Royal Society’2. In his old age he gave a characteristic of the sceptic Lucian; it seems an excellent picture of Dryden himself, at least of his mental make-up before his conversion to Roman Catholicism.